No surprise - Clarence Thomas is completely corrupt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This town is full of federal employees who can tell you that Thomas' excuses are complete BS. Stop covering for this crook.

Right? When I think about the hours and angst I spend a few months ago with my ethics officers to make sure that I was handling an outside activity properly - one that had *nothing* to do with my job... soooo frustrating....

Ok, and? This has zero to do with your job and what the standards are at that job. Please show us what he violated, specifically.

You can go back and see his votes. He took bribe for his vote. I guess you are saying a bribes are legal for conservative members of SCOTUS.

Can you point to the evidence? Did Crow have matters before the Court? Is there an appreciable difference between Thomas' rulings before and after he met Crow?

Read the thread, this has been covered. Crow is on the board of the American Enterprise Institute which files amicus briefs all the time.

This doesn't answer the question.

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-2004-03-14-0403130314-story.html

And on and on...

Whether RBG should have lent her name here, or RBG recused herself on that case, is perhaps a reasonable question. No secrecy there, and no financial benefit to RBG. But Thomas has received thousands and thousands of dollars from someone sitting the AEI's Board, without either disclosing it or recusing himself.

[Anonymous]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: in any advanced democracy Clarence Thomas would have already been forced to resign.

[Anonymous]

Clearly Clarence Thomas isn’t going anywhere. He will never be impeached and convicted.

However, can we all just take a step back and appreciate that a Supreme Court Justice says that one of his dearest friends is a guy who has a freaking signed copy of “Mein Kampf”? I mean WTAF? That’s seriously messed up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've said it before and I'll say it again: in any advanced democracy Clarence Thomas would have already been forced to resign.

America is broken. Thanks, Republicans.

[Anonymous]

The frustrations part is that there is a mechanism to force him to step down. His wife has criminal exposure for J6. There is a pressure point there and it should be pushed.
Until he decides to retire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've said it before and I'll say it again: in any advanced democracy Clarence Thomas would have already been forced to resign.

You’re right. Although we are an advanced democracy, we are facing internal threats from traitors within that have prevented us from working effectively.

And for the person who insists on having the specific name of a case that was affected: you don’t get it. That’s the whole point of having ethics; literally every decision Thomas has made is now tainted. Every decision. Because he’s shown himself to be an unprincipled jurist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've said it before and I'll say it again: in any advanced democracy Clarence Thomas would have already been forced to resign.

You’re right. Although we are an advanced democracy, we are facing internal threats from traitors within that have prevented us from working effectively.

And for the person who insists on having the specific name of a case that was affected: you don’t get it. That’s the whole point of having ethics; literally every decision Thomas has made is now tainted. Every decision. Because he’s shown himself to be an unprincipled jurist.

What a cop out...

Just say you don't have one and keep it moving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The frustrations part is that there is a mechanism to force him to step down. His wife has criminal exposure for J6. There is a pressure point there and it should be pushed.
Until he decides to retire.

Maybe you can’t reach Thomas, but you can reach Ginny, you can reach every GOP mega donor trying to buy him off, and you can reach every single family, friend, or clerk he’s talked to in the last two decades. Push everyone around him until it hurts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The frustrations part is that there is a mechanism to force him to step down. His wife has criminal exposure for J6. There is a pressure point there and it should be pushed.
Until he decides to retire.

Maybe you can’t reach Thomas, but you can reach Ginny, you can reach every GOP mega donor trying to buy him off, and you can reach every single family, friend, or clerk he’s talked to in the last two decades. Push everyone around him until it hurts.

You saying make his life hell until he steps down?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's so much wrong with this:
So many gifts: travel gifts, non-travel gifts (like the Frederick Douglass Bible), honorary gifts (the library wing), gift to his wife's group (donation).....
And Harlen is a collector of Hitler and Nazi memorabilia - and he displays it - in his home. Not to mention he's got statues of modern baddies that were once toppled by citizens and moved (I saw the word 'smuggled' used) to his backyard.
Then there's the crazy wife who buys into conspiracy theories and the 'election was stolen' lie.

Clarence Thomas does not have the ethical conscience and morality required to sit on the Supreme Court. His closest friends and family aren't mere Republican supporters. They are extremists.

You do know that after WWII, lots of people displayed Nazi memorabilia as trophies of victory. It is not unusual for that to occur in wars. Japanese swords, hats, etc, were also trophies. It does not mean he admires Nazis. You are really grasping here.


Gee, and the horrors of donating money to libraries in poor communities. How awful!

I don’t think a signed copy of “Mein Kampf” counts as a “victory trophy”. What kind of person would buy something like that, let alone proudly display it in their home? Unbelievable.

+1

Pretty sad that Ben Shapiro is lending his Jewish identity to excuse Crow.

But I guess we are now seeing very clearly how Shapiro gets his bread buttered. These rightwing billionaires own all these podcast bros.

[Anonymous]

I'll bet Gorsuch hates Thomas for this; regards him as tawdry, grubby, and mean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll bet Gorsuch hates Thomas for this; regards him as tawdry, grubby, and mean.

… why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've said it before and I'll say it again: in any advanced democracy Clarence Thomas would have already been forced to resign.

You’re right. Although we are an advanced democracy, we are facing internal threats from traitors within that have prevented us from working effectively.

And for the person who insists on having the specific name of a case that was affected: you don’t get it. That’s the whole point of having ethics; literally every decision Thomas has made is now tainted. Every decision. Because he’s shown himself to be an unprincipled jurist.

What a cop out...

Just say you don't have one and keep it moving.

Oh my god. It’s not a cop out. You guys wig out if the relative of a judge votes Democratic and here Clarence Thomas has been groomed by a billionaire and his seditionist wife has been too and we’re just supposed to pretend everything is copacetic. No. That’s why ethics guidance exists, fool; so that people are beyond reproach.

Clarence Thomas and his idiot supporters? Beyond help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've said it before and I'll say it again: in any advanced democracy Clarence Thomas would have already been forced to resign.

You’re right. Although we are an advanced democracy, we are facing internal threats from traitors within that have prevented us from working effectively.

And for the person who insists on having the specific name of a case that was affected: you don’t get it. That’s the whole point of having ethics; literally every decision Thomas has made is now tainted. Every decision. Because he’s shown himself to be an unprincipled jurist.

PP here - and it's my contention that we are not an advanced democracy, and this is but one of the signs of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll bet Gorsuch hates Thomas for this; regards him as tawdry, grubby, and mean.

… why?

Because Gorsuch seems like he has a stick up his ass and thinks his sh*t doesn't stink. I don't like his politics and often disagree with his judicial reasoning, but he gives off a very patrician vibe. If I'm reading him right, I'll bet he thinks that Thomas's venality is beneath the court.